Tomás MacGiolla
Ceist:16 Tomás Mac Giolla asked the Minister for Education when she proposes to correct the inequity whereby some of our post-primary schools have the advantage of a six year cycle while others are confined to a five year cycle.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - School Cycle.
William Cotter
Ceist:81 Mr. Cotter asked the Minister for Education her views on whether the administration of the transition year option is carried out on an equal basis in schools around the country; if her attention has been drawn to the fact that in some schools students have the option of studying over a six year period whereas in other schools students have no option but to take the leaving certificate after five years; her views on whether this is fair; and whether the option of taking six years to the leaving certificate should be available to all students in all schools.
Jimmy Deenihan
Ceist:211 Mr. Deenihan asked the Minister for Education if she intends to introduce a six year cycle in secondary schools.
Jim Mitchell
Ceist:236 Mr. J. Mitchell asked the Minister for Education if she has any plans to extend the cycle in community schools from five years to six years.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 16, 81, 211 and 236 together.
A significant number of schools already provide a second-level programme extending over six years through the operation of transition year programmes, vocational preparation and training courses at post-intermediate and/or post-leaving certificate level and repeat leaving certificate classes.
Over 400 post-primary schools offer vocational preparation and training courses at post-intermediate and/or post-leaving certificate level. A further 200 either offer or have the option of offering transition year programmes. About 7,000 students repeat the leaving certificate each year representing a significant number of schools and, in addition, some 2,000 students repeat other standards in post-primary schools for a variety of reasons.
I am currently examining the total provision of this nature in second level schools so as to allow further consideration to be given to the question of the varied range of a six year cycle option.
Am I to take it from the Minister's reply that she is considering the inequity of the present position where some schools have a five year cycle and others have a six year cycle? There is gross inequity in education in this area. The Minister said she was considering having a six year or a five year cycle in all schools. However, a five year cycle does not exist in the rest of Europe and I wonder if the Minister recognises the inequity between the six year cycle and the five year cycle? Why do some schools have a six-year cycle while others are confined to a five-year cycle?
The rest of Europe does not go to school proper at age four. We make full provision for that in this country. With regard to the question which the Deputy put to me regarding the number of schools, as I have said, there are approximately 800 second level schools of which 600 are at present offering a six year cycle. Many schools have opted to have a vocational preparation and training year sometimes two years. That is their preferred option. Others have opted for a transition year programme and others are coming up with varied ideas. They want a definitive repeat leaving certificate fully recognised and their school recognised as one which offers that. As I said, 600 out of 800 second level schools have at present, in one way or another, a six year and sometimes a seven year programme. In the total provision of this nature, which has grown enormously over the last few years, we are looking at what can be done to make it coherent, with schools providing a choice.
Could I ask the Minister——
Deputy Mac Giolla, I appeal for brevity.
Is the Minister saying that if a school wants a six year cycle they can have it? Is that the procedure she is aiming at?
There is a great debate about this matter because many schools now see that the vocational preparation and training programmes are suited to their school, their pupil intake or the paths the pupils wish to take when they leave school, and they are considering whether this is what they wish to pursue. As regards providing differing types of six year programmes, we are looking at what we offer now and what can be offered.
Question No. 17, Deputy John Bruton.
May I comment on this question?
I am sorry, I cannot entertain the Deputy. This is Priority Question Time and supplementaries are confined to the Deputies who put down the questions nominated for priority.
That is a shame.
On a point of order, the time for priority questions has long passed.
Deputy McCartan, you should leave these matters to the Chair. I am very conscious of these matters and I need no assistance from you.
I am leaving it entirely to you.
Leave it to me. I have called Question No. 17.
On a point of order——
Please, Deputy McCartan, I resent this interference. It is impossible for the Chair to end matters on the exact time. I am permitting a little discretion in the matter.
Under Standing Orders there is no discretion.
Is there not?
I would have thought not.
I have often given the Deputy a lot of discretion.
I appreciate fully the point you are making but I want to make a response. The Workers' Party have been very seriously injured in the issue of priority questions and for that reason we feel that——
The Chair does its best to be impartial in these matters. The Deputy is not helping me by interfering in the Chair's discretion in this matter.